please explain to me why shooting a man 7 times in the back is justified

[TheButcher]

Shooting a man inches away 7 times in the back, these officers need to be in prison not on "Administrative leave"
Anyone who shoots a man 7 times would be in prison not walking freely outside. This is criminal.

Here is the cellphone video of the incident where Mr Jacob Blake is walking to his car, 2 policemen follow him at close range, one grabs his shirt and shoot him 7 times.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS5cSwVEyDg[/youtube]

Okay I've read a story or two how Blake was reportedly breaking up an argument between 2 women, what happened I have no idea, just saying what I have read but let's take a moment figure the shooting part out.

He's not visibly holding a weapon nor pointing it to the officers. He's not running away, he's walking to his car. The officer grabs him by the shirt shoots him 7 ties with his 3 kids in the car. Let's assume the officer thought Mr Blake was going to drive away, why not user taze him, they were within inches of him. Why not shoot blow out his tire(s) so he could not drive away. Why shoot a man 7 times in the back who is not visibly threatening your life.

This is just unacceptable, I don't care how they explain it or spin this story. There was no justifiable reason to shoot him, let alone 7 times in the back. How I understand it police officers can shoot if their lives are at risk, where is that officers life at risk who shot the man in the back at close range.

I am honestly sickened by what can only be explained as systemic abuse of black people by white cops. Guess why people of colour hate cops and try to avoid them or run away, they know a lot of white cops are dangerous to their health, no other way I can explain it.

Sad really sad how cops who are supposed to serve and protect the public do these crimes.

[fantastico]

Now you understand what the protests are about

[bill]

1. Police were called because Jacob Blake was waving a knife around and in conjunction with a domestic situation (not because he was roaming the countryside as a non-violent friendly fellow). While en route, dispatch informed police that Blake had an outstanding warrant in regard to his recent sexual assault and domestic abuse charges.

2. Police deployed a taser and it failed, as they are prone to do more than we'd like, despite being a great tool.

3. Research thus far, very early, is showing that Blake said he had a gun in the car and was going to go get it. He continued to brandish the knife while disregarding officer commands to drop it, which would have ended the situation PEACEFULLY, if he'd have complied with such lawful orders.

4. When he reached into the car, officers fired. Why? Because he already has one weapon and says he's getting a gun next from the location he's reaching into.

I'll continue to wait for all facts but these seem to be what has been established for me thus far.

[TheButcher]

I had not read any of that Bill, going to go look it up now.

[jag]

How it was presented on he news when it happened is not any where near the one you posted Bill. Every news site has an agenda of their own. It is so hard to know who is telling the truth these days.

[bestfreeporn]

What ever the facts the cop still shot him 7 times in the fucking back

[BrasSmonkey]

fuck a protest you wait for what is the next step mofos

[HeidiHoe]

It's fucked up no matter how you slice it. Since when is it okay for cops to be judge, jury, and executioner?

They had him by the tshirt. If he did pose a thread, are you seriously telling me they could not have subdued him without shooting him?

Did they even attempt to talk with him? Shit like this should never happen. I don't care who he is or what he did or didn't do. Cops should never use force unless necessary to prevent harm. Not to cause harm.

[BHT]

You have a man t arms length by the shirt, as HeidiHoe says. You could tazer him whatever, not shoot 7 times into him for fuck sake. This is the type of behaiour cops pull that causes riots and civil unrest for months.